"I think I've found a track, what do you think?" A

Archived here are older posts which are no longer relevant or were redundant.

Moderators: Stardust@home Team, DustMods

Post Reply
dd
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 6:47 am
Location: Nara, Japan
Contact:

Post by dd » Tue Aug 08, 2006 3:50 am

Belinda posted another nice track on the "I found a cute, funny, interesting, etc. movie" thread: http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... e_id=45740

Its much closer to the surface and I think we even see the start of the track. It's a beautiful example because unlike the two others posted here we can clearly see the slope of the track.

Good catch Belinda! :-)

Orion_0169
Posts: 153
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:17 pm

Post by Orion_0169 » Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:02 am

dd Those 25 agreements are for 65 viewings. The 10 agreements for the bad focus movie I discussed are for 27 viewings. As percentages they are very close to the same. Keep in mind the bad focus one should have been obvious. And it wasn't. For almost 40% of viewers.
Je ne peux pas regarder la Mer sans me demander qui vit au-delà de cela.

dd
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 6:47 am
Location: Nara, Japan
Contact:

Post by dd » Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:40 am

Orion_0169 wrote:dd Those 25 agreements are for 65 viewings. The 10 agreements for the bad focus movie I discussed are for 27 viewings. As percentages they are very close to the same. Keep in mind the bad focus one should have been obvious. And it wasn't. For almost 40% of viewers.
I missed that... Anyway it's clear that some things have not been understood by a number of people. Maybe the tutorial should be more explicit on how focusing works, with a small animation for example? But it may become too technical for most of the volunteers.

Personally I don't care too much about too many false positives: it's not my job ;-) I trust that if the stardust team sees a problem they will react in a way or another to correct it. For example by adding false positives movies in the set of calibration movies. Secretly of course ;-) ;-)

cthiker
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 10:35 am
Location: Woodbridge, CT

Post by cthiker » Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:28 am

dd wrote:Personally I don't care too much about too many false positives: it's not my job ;-) I trust that if the stardust team sees a problem they will react in a way or another to correct it. For example by adding false positives movies in the set of calibration movies. Secretly of course ;-) ;-)
Damien (et. al.)...

IMHO, I think you have hit the proverbial nail on the head (or lense on the dust?)! Whether one thinks that these "tracks" were made by spacedust or not (and, for the record, I still don't think either of these fit the model I would expect - but then again I'm not an astrophysicist! :wink: ), I have come to the conclusion that identifying them is worthwhile, since all we can do is speculate - the S@H team has the tools necessary to evaluate (ie, confirm/deny).

Yeah, you probably are making more "work" for the team, but one of their tenets has always been "expect the unexpected" - they really don't know exactly what the tracks will look like in all cases themselves. The upside is that this gives them a chance to make pre-qualified candidate reviews, and considering that without us the effort on their part would have been far, far greater, I really don't think they mind the downside, looking thru a few extra non-tracks along the way.

Lastly, interesting commentary and perspectives on this thread - you guys (of all genders) have been very enlightening and I appreciate the chance to read through your viewpoints!! :D

Best of luck, and happy dusting!!
Jeff

Ulrich Rieth
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 10:50 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany, 53.55°N, 10.05°E, 7m, JO53AN
Contact:

Post by Ulrich Rieth » Tue Aug 08, 2006 7:08 am

How about this picture perfect lateral track?
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... e_id=24625
It even shows a ring strucure at the entrance.
Cheers!

Ulrich

Sharqua
DustMod
Posts: 245
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 1:02 am
Location: Bradenton, FL

Post by Sharqua » Tue Aug 08, 2006 8:08 am

Ulrich Rieth wrote:How about this picture perfect lateral track?
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... e_id=24625
It even shows a ring strucure at the entrance.
Interesting.

This one's hard to make a call on because it drops to the bottom of the focus bar too early. It's a definite possibility, though, because is shows aspects of both an entry hole and a POSSIBLE track. I'm a little leery of the color of that track, though -- it's awfully dark and might just be a shadow. See the other objects at surface in the movie? They are showing similar shades of color at the same depth.

I dunno. I'd definitely have clicked it, but it's borderline and really needs a deeper movie.

-Shar

dd
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 6:47 am
Location: Nara, Japan
Contact:

Another one bites the dust...

Post by dd » Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:28 am

OK, this one is not so obvious but it's the biggest one I've ever seen. The funny part is that I'm the 64th person to see this movie and I'm the first one to flag it... So either I'm crazy (likely ;-)) or you should not be too desperate about being the first to find a track. Let's look at it:

http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... e_id=16671
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... d=404119V1
I know it does not look very convincing so here's two annotated images:

Image Image

The first one is the nearly focused surface (we a slightly below the surface which is never perfectly focused in this movie). The circle highlights a small point which is also almost in focus. That point indicates that the aerogel is relatively flat in this region since it's focused roughly at the depth as the large feature a few cm away.

The second one is the lowest slice. You can see 'something large' coming in focus. Focus is not reached but it's clearly below the surface since there is a point right above with a better focus (first image). And since it's a linear feature...

Of course (?) the track is very large and too deep to be star dust (another wild guess). Referring to one of the example movies mentioned earlier in this thread I would classify this as a micro meteorite track.

About the trajectory: the focus on the upper left large chunk of the track is slightly worse than the focus on the other large chunk (5cm away). It could mean that the track is tilted (good news) and that the object penetrated from the lower boundary of the image.

I know I'm doing a bit too much detective work on these movies... but I'm having fun so I must be doing it right, right? :) Now what's your opinion? Is it really hot or do I need to get some coffee? :shock:
Last edited by dd on Wed Aug 09, 2006 8:55 pm, edited 3 times in total.

peliROJO
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 1:31 pm
Contact:

Post by peliROJO » Wed Aug 09, 2006 8:39 am

I came across this video and see three tiny dots appear below the surface. One is near the middle and the other two are on the left. None are at the same layer.

It's at 77 viewings and 12 Agreements.

great97452
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 4:57 am
Location: China

Post by great97452 » Wed Aug 09, 2006 9:12 am

peliROJO wrote:I came across this video and see three tiny dots appear below the surface. One is near the middle and the other two are on the left. None are at the same layer.

It's at 77 viewings and 12 Agreements.
The one near the middle and one on the left all looks like a track to me.But I can't find another one which you've said on the left . They are too small.

Protostar
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 10:58 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Movie #33318

Post by Protostar » Wed Aug 09, 2006 11:38 am

:wink: Whoever has movie #33318 in their account, I just wanted to let you know I'm the only other person who has agreed with you. So. . . if there is spacedust, remember me buddy! :wink:
Wishes, lies, and dreams all spring from the same well. Knowing when to drink requires only a little common sense.

icebike

Re: Movie #33318

Post by icebike » Wed Aug 09, 2006 2:39 pm

Protostar wrote::wink: Whoever has movie #33318 in their account, I just wanted to let you know I'm the only other person who has agreed with you. So. . . if there is spacedust, remember me buddy! :wink:
That was me, but I clicked it by mistake when dropped my mouse on the floor. Lucky it wasn't a calibration movie...








:twisted: Just kidding, or course.

DustBuster
DustMod
Posts: 694
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 8:12 pm
Location: Horsetown, USA

Post by DustBuster » Wed Aug 09, 2006 2:55 pm

Hi. This kind of belongs in the "I think I found a track" sticky, so I have reposted it over there.

This one is locked.






d8/10
No dessert for you- ONE MONTH!

jsellers
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 9:32 pm

WOW, looks like I found another one

Post by jsellers » Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:56 pm

It looks like I snagged some more comet dust!

http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/4175 ... ustru4.gif

I guess this means we all missed the boat. Whoops!

plexuz
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 7:51 am
Location: GTA, On, Canada

Multiple small tracks or just artefacts?

Post by plexuz » Thu Aug 10, 2006 8:03 am

The movie 5860637V1 has something like multiple tracks. I counted 7! Is it possible at all, or it's just an artefact? Another question - which one should I click?

DustBuster
DustMod
Posts: 694
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 8:12 pm
Location: Horsetown, USA

Re: Multiple small tracks or just artefacts?

Post by DustBuster » Thu Aug 10, 2006 8:35 am

plexuz wrote:The movie 5860637V1 has something like multiple tracks. I counted 7! Is it possible at all, or it's just an artefact? Another question - which one should I click?
Hi plexuz.

This post falls into the Discussion forum sticky category of "I think I've found a track, what do you think?" Please re-post your message there (here is the link) http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... .php?t=647

Thank you.
(locked 8/10)
No dessert for you- ONE MONTH!

Post Reply